We've all come to understand and start implementing ITIL practices within our organizations, and some of us are obtaining positives results at different levels. But in the process of creating awareness for ITIL within our organizations it's unavoidable to find people who are against the adoption of ITIL practices, based on experience, stuff they've read, etc.

Thus I wonder:
Which are the most widely known ITIL disadvantages?

What are those negative issues that we as members of the ITSM department within organization should be prepared to give answers to?

I think this is a good excercise for all of us, since eventually in the process of implementing ITIL practices we'll find people (either top execs or employees) that will have "a lot to say" against ITIL.

With regard to people that are objecting to 'ITIL' one thing to check yourself on is whether you are inadvertantly presenting ITIL as an objective.

ITIL isn't the goal of ITIL (so to speak) - Quality, business-enabling, IT services are the goal, and ITIL is a framework for achieving it.

So spend time finding out what people's ITSM objectives are, and work at presenting those aspects of the framework that address those objectives.

Identifying 'disadvantages' in ITIL is tricky. Detrimental outcomes from the application of the framework a more likely to come down to problems in how it is used.

ITIL does have 'gaps' - in that it is not the complete 'recipe' for quality service management. Being unaware of, or ignoring, additional requirements and challenges will create problems - some of which can be quite serious. The risk factors are specific to the business context, so I list some gaps that may need to be addresses.

* ITIL does not provide much detail (apart from a few 'examples') on the information requirements of the various processes. But in truth, any ITIL implementation will require a lot of attention be given to information architecture. (Current tool sets will help with, but not substitute for addressing site specific requirements).

* ITIL can be misunderstood as an alternative for current systems management methodologies and, as a result;

Lead to resources being pulled off systems management that shouldn't be.
Lead to an under-estimation of additional costs and workloads. And the time to ROI can be considerable.

* ITIL emphasises 'roles' and 'responsibilities' not positions: But you cannot put a process in place and expect compliance unless there is accountability assigned somewhere for the outcomes of that process.

* It can happen that you go from an enviroment characterised by technology based 'silos' to one characterised by ITIL silos.

* ITIL is a poor objective for an IT organisation - ITIL is how you get to your objectives.

* Even though the library frequently asserts the need to apply the framework in a phased manner, it doesn't acknowledge that this is very difficult, that a lot of the processes are not designed in the first place to work well either partially implemented or in the absence of related processes. That is ITIL doesn't actually scale that well because it wasn't developed as a scaled approach. It doesn't provide any useful guidance on how it can be scaled.

I think it's best to frame an implementation as a "process improvement program based on ITIL best practices" Otherwise you run the risk of having to imply (or state) that something's broke, and that always gets someone upset

All excellent points. Especially the one regardin that ITIL is not the objective, Improving the quality of your services is really a great goal.

Think of it as
Define -> Control -> Measure -> Improve

And as far as disadvantages, if your goals are increased quality and control of costs (by using ITIL input to processes), I see no disadvantages. If however you are stating that only ITIL will be used to model your processes, then yes, the disadvantage is in the fact that ITIL itself sends a message of ... use what works for your business.

Always remember, that there is no 100% ITIL way. ITIL is like a snowflake. Every implementation of a SIP using ITIL is different.

ITIL is all positive by itself. Once implemented correctly as a best practice , it only can do good to the organization which endorses it. However, this does not stop the surrounding negative atmosphere right from the beginning till the end.

In the beginning, there are those who don't understand it, those who don't appreciate its value, those who doubt everything, those who just love what they have and feel reluctant to change. There are those who wish to stay in their comfort zone and not having to teach the old dogs new tricks.

During the implementation, there are those who don't cooperate, those who are passive if not negative, those who wish and work to make the initiative fail ,,,

After implementation, there might be a false feeling of relaxation, celebration, abuse, and false feeling that we are there already. Then there are those who may still question what has been really achieved and throw suspicion on the whole thing.

To get out of this, higher management may wish to tie this initiative to a tangible objective with a quantifiable and measurable business value, something like the BS15000 certification similar to how the industry accepted ISO9000 as an industry standard pre-requisite for serious business.

...this does not stop the surrounding negative atmosphere right from the beginning till the end.

In the beginning, there are those who don't understand it, those who don't appreciate its value, those who doubt everything, those who just love what they have and feel reluctant to change. There are those who wish to stay in their comfort zone and not having to teach the old dogs new tricks.

During the implementation, there are those who don't cooperate, those who are passive if not negative, those who wish and work to make the initiative fail.

After implementation, there might be a false feeling of relaxation, celebration, abuse, and false feeling that we are there already. Then there are those who may still question what has been really achieved and throw suspicion on the whole thing...

While I agree with what you are saying, I don't believe this is a disadvantage perculiar to ITIL. What you have captured here is a characteristic of poor;y implemented organisational change in general. The key for senior management is communication. This may be a directive or participatory, it depends on the culture of the organisation.

I once met someone who used a book-to-movie analogy for ITIL and I think it is particulrly relevant. If you were adapting a book for a movie, it is unlikely that you would take the book, chapter by chapter and script it. Just because it is a good book, doesn't mean it is a good movie. Instead you might take the central plot and important themes and craft that into something workable and meaningful.

It is the same with ITIL. It is a good series of books, but each organisation should take the basic plot and central themes and work them so they are relevant to the organisation.